Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Community pharmacists’ perceptions of medicines use reviews and quality assurance by peer review

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Pharmacy World & Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives To explore existing mechanism to ensure quality assurance of medicine use reviews (MURs), and to identify those parameters of an MUR that community pharmacists consider as indicators of quality. Setting Community pharmacists undertaking MURs in Cornwall, United Kingdom. Method A questionnaire was developed to investigate pharmacists’ attitudes towards MURs and towards quality assurance of MURs. Questionnaires were distributed during December 2008 to a sample of pharmacists in Cornwall accredited to provide the service. Main outcome measures Community pharmacists’ attitudes towards quality assurance of MURs. Results Fifty completed questionnaires were returned, a third of which were from locum pharmacists. The most frequently reported determinant for undertaking an MUR was the pharmacist’s judgement. Company policy to deliver MURs was acknowledged as a potential indicator of a sub-optimal MUR. Pharmacists shared a common sense of what constitutes a “poor” MUR but not what defines a quality one. Conclusion For peer review to operate as an effective mechanism to assure quality of MURs, pharmacists need to develop an effective forum to share their practice experiences.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+
from $39.99 /Month
  • Starting from 10 chapters or articles per month
  • Access and download chapters and articles from more than 300k books and 2,500 journals
  • Cancel anytime
View plans

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles and news from researchers in related subjects, suggested using machine learning.

References

  1. Blenkinsopp A, Celino G. Long term conditions: integrating community pharmacy’s contribution. Report 3. London: Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain and Webstar Health; 2006. www.rpsgb.org/pdfs/ltcondintegcommphrept3.pdf. Accessed 2 Mar 2009.

  2. Emblen G, Miller E. Home medicines review. The how and why for GPs. Aust Fam Physician. 2004;33:49–51.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Implementing the new community pharmacy contractual framework. Information for primary care trusts. London: Department of Health; 2005. www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_4109256. Accessed 2 Mar 2009.

  4. PSNC, BMA, NHS Employers. Briefing for GP practices. Achieving best value from the community pharmacy medicines use review service. London: NHS Employers; 2009. www.nhsemployers.org/publications. Accessed 2 Mar 2009.

  5. Bradley F, Wagner AC, Elvey R, Noyce PR, Ashcroft DM. Determinants of the uptake of medicines use reviews (MURs) by community pharmacies in England: a multi-method study. Health Policy. 2008;88:258–68.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Portlock J, Holden M, Patel S. A community pharmacy asthma MUR project in Hampshire and the Isle of Wight. Pharm J. 2009;282:109–12.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Murphy JA. Employers applying pressure to conduct MURs. Pharm J. 2007;279:258.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Richards A. Medicine use review. Pharm J. 2008;280:750.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Pharmaceutical Services Negotiating Committee. Competency framework for the assessment of pharmacists providing the medicine use review (MUR) and prescription intervention service. http://www.psnc.org.uk/pages/mur_accreditation.html. Accessed 3 Mar 2009.

  10. James DL, Hatten S, Roberts D, John DN. Identifying criteria for assessing the quality of medicines use review referral documentation by community pharmacists. Int J Pharm Pract. 2008;16:365–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Blenkinsopp A, Celino G, Bond C, Inch J. Medicine use reviews: the first year of a new community pharmacy contract. Pharm J. 2007;278:218–23.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Pharmacy in England—building on strengths—delivering the future. London: Stationery Office; 2008. ISBN 9780101734127 http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/publicationsandstatistics/publications/publicationspolicyandguidance/dh_083815. Accessed 3 Mar 2009.

  13. Harding G, Wilcock M. What do pharmacists think of peer review of medicines use reviews? Pharm J. 2008;281:674–6.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Latif A, Boardman H. Community pharmacists’ attitudes towards medicines use reviews and factors affecting the numbers performed. Pharm World Sci. 2008;30:536–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Urban R, Rivers P, Morgan J. Perceptions of medicine use reviews—the views of community pharmacists within a West Yorkshire Primary Care Trust. Pharm J. 2008;281:303–5.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Bassi M, Wood K. Medicine use reviews: time for a new name? Int J Pharm Pract. 2009;17(Suppl 2):B4–5.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Campion P, Hilton A, Irving G. Shared prescribing? A focus group study with community pharmacists. Prim Health Care Res Dev. 2007;8:308–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Gifford A, Murphy R, Anderson C. ‘Helpful others’: a vital resource for pharmacists’ learning? Int J Pharm Pract. 2008;16(Suppl 1):A9–A10.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Scwartzkoff J. Evaluation of the Home Medicines Review Program: pharmacy component. Canberra: Urbis Keys Young; 2005.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the study participants.

Funding

This study was funded by NHS Cornwall and Isles of Scilly.

Conflicts of interest statement

MW works for NHS Cornwall and Isles of Scilly.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Peninsula College of Medicine and Dentistry, Exeter, UK

    Geoffrey Harding

  2. NHS Cornwall & Isles of Scilly, c/o Pharmacy Department, Royal Cornwall Hospitals NHS Trust, Truro, Cornwall, TR1 3LJ, UK

    Michael Wilcock

Authors
  1. Geoffrey Harding
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael Wilcock
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael Wilcock.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Harding, G., Wilcock, M. Community pharmacists’ perceptions of medicines use reviews and quality assurance by peer review. Pharm World Sci 32, 381–385 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-010-9381-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-010-9381-1

Keywords